Re: One Ring to Bind Them

From: Eric Kaun <ekaun_at_prodigy.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 02:51:35 GMT
Message-ID: <XKnHc.2164$lP5.304@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>

Laconic2 wrote:

> "Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message
> news:aFAEc.3451$IQ4.1727_at_attbi_s02...
> 
> 
>

>>Many to many relationships are one thing that the RM just totally
>>nails. I bring this up not to run a whole "mine's bigger" thing but
>>because I believe that if this entire years-long conversation has
>>a use, it is to highlight the areas where each side succeeds, so
>>that we may begin to work towards a new model that encompases
>>the best of several existing systems.
>>
>>In programming languages, they are talkin more and more about
>>"multiparadigm." I think we should follow their lead.

> 
> 
> Hear, Hear!

In support of this effort, I've taken all of my dimes and created a set (or is it a list?) of stacks, 2 in each stack. Thus ends my support of multi pair-o-dimes.

The problem, of course, is deciding where those paradigms apply... but I certainly support the desire to merge them somehow. The Xen effort, funded by Microsoft Research (I forget the researchers and am too lazy to look them up) looks somewhat promising, though from what I've seen it still completely lacks any declarative constraints.

Received on Thu Jul 08 2004 - 21:51:35 CDT